12 Staff Report - 2007/08 Budget Approval~t N 0
io~~`fo5'
S Gpt
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MAY 31, 2007
MEETING DATE: 6/4/2007
ITEM NO: 1 -'1
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL/
CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE TOWN AND
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY'S FISCAL YEAR 2007/08 OPERATING
BUDGET, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEARS 2007/08-
2011/12, CARRY-FORWARD APPROPRIATIONS, AND OTHER
APPROVED ADJUSTMENTS AND MINOR CORRECTIONS
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt resolution approving the FY 2007/08 Operating and Capital Summary Budget and
the FY 2007-12 Capital Improvement Plan for the Town of Los Gatos, directing staff to
incorporate within the final adopted budget any changes related to Council approved
meet and confer process or management compensation plan amendments, classification
adjustments or minor corrections, carryforward appropriations, changes due to more
refined estimates and grant approvals, or additional Town Council direction received by
staff upon adoption of the budget.
2. Adopt resolution approving the FY 2007/08 Operating and Capital Summary Budget and
the FY 2007-12 Capital Improvement Plan for the Redevelopment Agency of Los Gatos,
directing staff to incorporate within the final adopted budget any changes related to
Council approved meet and confer process or management compensation plan
amendments, classification adjustments or minor corrections, carryforward
appropriations, changes due to more refined estimates and grant approvals, or additional
Town Council direction received by staff upon adoption of the budget.
PREPARED BY
STEPHEN CONWAY
Finance & Administrative Services Director
CADocuments and Settings\pjacobs.LOSGATOSCA\Desktop\2007-08 TCR Budget Adopt.doc
Reviewed by: ' , Assistant Town Manager Town Attorney
Clerk Administrator Finance Community Development
PAGE 2
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
BACKGROUND:
On May 7, 2007, a public hearing was held on the Town and Redevelopment Agency's Proposed
FY 2007/08 Operating & Capital Summary Budget, and Proposed FY 2007-12 Capital
Improvement Plan. The Town Council considered both documents, recommended minor
changes, and directed staff to bring back the documents for final approval.
Prior to Council consideration of the CIP, the Planning Commission reviewed the CIP as
required by State law on April 11, 2007. The Commission determined that the CIP is consistent
with the General Plan, and all specific plans.
As a result of Council discussion and additional information received subsequent to this meeting
date, staff recommends several appropriation modifications to the Proposed Operating and
Capital Budget and CIP, as detailed in the following discussion. Any additional changes or
corrections directed by the Town Council upon adoption of the budget can be incorporated into
the final authorized budget as provided for in the adopted Budget Resolution.
DISCUSSION:
RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS TO THE PROPOSED FY 2007/08 OPERATING &
CAPITAL BUDGET
Staff recommends the following modifications to the Proposed Budget:
Property Tax Administration Fee Increase. On May 10, 2007, staff received notice from the
Santa Clara County Executive of an increase to property tax administration fees for work
done in the County's Tax Collector's Office (Attachment 3). The letter explains that the
County has historically recovered approximately 24% of its actual property tax collection
costs incurred for administering property tax collection services for cities, special districts,
and redevelopment agencies. In 2004, Senate Bill 1096 was enacted into law which the
County cites as its authority to increase its recovery rate from county taxing jurisdictions to
approximately 33% of its actual costs for FY 2007/08. (Senate Bill 1096 was the Vehicle
License Fee (VLF) and Sales Tax "Triple Flip" bill which increased property taxes for cities
by swapping sales tax and VLF fees for new allocations of property tax, excluded cities from
any property tax administration fees for 2005 & 2006, and allowed the new taxes to be
subject to fees from 2007 onwards). Staff recommends increasing the property tax
administration fees for the Town by $61,200 from the Proposed Budget amount of $128,800
to a new total of $190,000 for next year. Staff recommends increasing the property tax
administration fees for the RDA by $20,300 to a new total of $85,260 for next year from the
Proposed Budget amount of $64,960.
PAGE 3
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
2. United Way "211" Contribution-Recommending $2,500 Expenditure Increase. As discussed
at the May 7th Council meeting, the United Way has requested a donation of $5,000 from the
Town for its new program "2-1-1 Santa Clara County," a health and human service
information and referral service. Each of the municipalities in the County received a request;
the amount is based on population tiers. The Council discussed the request, and expressed its
interest in supporting the program with one-time funding of $2,500 for FY 2007/08. Future
year funding requests would be made through the Town's community grant program and
would be contingent upon the receipt of a report from the United Way outlining its specific
progress to date, and its future funding and administrative plans. Staff will advise the United
Way of the anticipated process timeline for FY 2008-09.
3. Solid Waste Program Landfill Fees-Recommending $32,130 Adjustment to Solid Waste &
General Fund Revenues and Expenditures. The Town was recently advised by the West
Valley Solid Waste Management Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that the landfill fees had been
increased by Waste Management by 3.10% (per agreement with the JPA and Waste
Management, the increase is limited to 90% of the 3.44% (i.e. 3.10%) calculated increase to
the Consumer Price Index). The agreement provided that the increase is to become effective
July 1, 2007. Unfortunately, the JPA has advised us that the initial collection rates for the
period March 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008 did not include an estimate for the contractual
disposal rate change on July 1, 2007. Normally, a change in disposal rate would be reflected
in a change to the collection rates charges by the JPA to its residential and commercial
customers. However, because new rates were just implemented March 1, 2007, with an
expectation that they would be effective until July 1, 2008, the JPA staff recommended
avoiding increasing rates by using other solid waste fund resources. Town staff recommends
using $32,130 funds in a deposit account that are restricted for solid waste program purposes
and are held in the General Fund. The current balance of this deposit account is
approximately $179,000. This amount is recommended for a one-time transfer to the Solid
Waste Program Fund. Future rate increases are expected to provide funding to cover any
increases to the contractual disposal rates.
PAGE 4
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
The table below presents revised summary fund information which incorporates these modifications into
the FY 2007/08 proposed budget reviewed by Town Council on May 7, 2007.
FY 2007/08 FY 2007/08
Proposed
Budget
Recommended
TOWN REVENUES & OTHER FUNDING SOURCES
Budget
Revisions
Budget
General Fund
31,038,930
32,130
31,071,060
Special Revenue Funds
665,688
32,130
697,818
Internal Service Funds
4,337,030
-
4,337,030
Trust & Agency Funds
181,530
-
181,530
Capital Project Funds
5,776,044
-
5,776,044
Redevelopment Agency Funds
8,874,790
-
8,874,790
Total Town Revenues & Transfers In
50,874,012
64,260
50,938,272
TOTAL TOWN REVENUES & OTHER FUNDING SOURCES 50,874,012 64,260 50,938,272
TOTAL TOWN EXPENDITURES, TRANSFERS OUT & CARRYFORWARD APPROPRIATIONS
General Fund
30,597,067
95,830 *
30,692,897
Special Revenue Funds
942,388
32,130
974,518
Internal Service Funds
4,987,200
-
4,987,200
Trust & Agency Funds
181,140
-
181,140
Capital Project Funds
7,161,846
-
7,161,846
Redevelopment Agency Funds
6,470,650
20,300
6,490,950
TOTAL TOWN EXPENDITURES & OTHER FUNDING USES
50,340,291
148,260
50,488,551
TOTAL SOURCES OVER USES OF FUNDS
533,721
(84,000)
449,721
* Includes $61,200 SCC Property Tax Admin, $2,500 United Way 2-1-1 Funding & $32,130 Transfer Out.
The revised Town and RDA Recommended Budget for FY 2007/08 retains a small surplus of revenues
and other funding sources above expenditures with total revenues and other funding sources of
$50,938,272 exceeding total operating and capital expenditures of $50,488,551.
4. Change to Schedule for Elm St. Reconstruction Project in CIP. Town Council requested that
the schedule for the Elm St. Reconstruction Project in the CIP be accelerated from its
targeted spring, 2008 schedule to summer, 2007. This schedule change has been made, and
the project will occur in August. Communication with the merchants in the area has begun.
This change will be reflected in the adopted CIP.
Other Budget Issues
Staffing Issues
During the public hearing Council questioned the adequacy of staffing levels for public safety
(patrol and school resource officers) and for parks and public works. Staff recommends that this
PAGE 5
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
matter be re-evaluated at either the first quarter or the mid-year FY 2007/08 review. This
recommendation is proposed because certain factors affecting staffing levels are anticipated by
staff to be better understood at that time. Specifically, two new police officer trainees will soon
be graduating from the academy and will be joining the patrol force, adding to staffing levels and
bringing the department to its recommended staffing levels. In addition, this will allow time for
the Police Department to assess the approach of collateral assignments for school resource
officers and to explore funding options with the schools.
Another public safety funding issue to be addressed at mid-year is the contract with Monte
Sereno. Staff will continue to discuss terms and conditions over the next six months to
understand the possible impact of GASB 45 on public safety costs and to consider tying the
Monte Sereno contract with the Police Officers Association contract agreements in future years.
Regarding staffing levels for parks and public works, the department continues its organizational
assessment to determine appropriate structure and staffing levels necessary to provide efficient
service delivery to the community. At this time, staff recommends the staffing as brought
forward in the Proposed Budget until more data is available and the permanent Director is in
place, potentially at the first quarter or mid-year.
Interest Accrual Practices on General Fund Reserves & Deposits
During presentation of the Proposed Budget for FY 2007/08, a question was raised about the
Town's procedures for crediting interest to certain identified accounts, including traffic
mitigation fee and reserve accounts. With regard to the Traffic Mitigation Fees, these fees are
paid on a town-wide basis and not specifically designated for any one project or location. The
monies are accumulated in the Traffic Mitigation Fund which is used in the Capital Improvement
Plan as a funding source for traffic flow enhancement projects on major Town arterials.
The current practice the Town uses on invested cash balances is to credit the interest earned to
the General Fund investment earnings revenue line item. This revenue account represents a
significant component (approximately 5%) of the Town's total General Fund operating revenues.
The Town's annual operating revenues are used to provide funding sources for the annual cost of
providing Town services. Accordingly, the Town does not specifically credit interest to any
specific reserve accounts or deposits unless required by law. This practice is customary for
California local governments. The State Controller considers interest earnings from reserves and
deposits "general revenue" which can be used to fund all local government functions such as
public safety or parks and public works. The Town could elect through Council direction to
voluntarily apportion interest to certain deposits or reserves, (for instance, should a sale of land
occur, the reserve account could be credited with interest earned) on a case-by-case basis, but
because interest is a vital source of operating revenues, staff recommends this practice be
imposed on a very selected basis.
PAGE 6
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
Encumbered Items Outstanding at June 30, 2007
Town policy calls for unexpended encumbered funds to lapse at the end of the fiscal year.
However, Town policy also provides that valid encumbrances open at the end of the fiscal year
may be carried forward to the following fiscal year and re-appropriated from the encumbrance
reserve dollars set aside upon the close of the prior fiscal year.
Because of the need to reduce expenditures, the majority of encumbrances will be closed out
during the year-end process or paid in full by the time of the final fiscal year close-out and will
not be carried forward to FY 2007/08. Only on an exception basis through Town Manager's
approval are outstanding encumbrances or unspent appropriated balances from the prior year
carried forward. These amounts will be reserved in their respective funds at year end under a
designated reserve. Capital Project Fund appropriations differ in that encumbrances are carried
forward to the following fiscal year until the projects are completed.
Non-Encumbered Items
In addition to the open encumbrances outstanding at year-end, staff is proposing to bring forward
remaining current year appropriations for unexpended balances in its grant funded operating
projects. Grants provide matching revenues for expenditures and often span two or three fiscal
years in their program or project implementation.
Final Adopted Budget Changes FY 2007108
The resolution adopting the FY 2007/08 recommended budget directs staff to include changes
resulting from Council approval of the meet and confer process or management compensation
plan, from classification adjustments or miscellaneous corrections, from changes due to more
refined estimates or grant approvals, or from further Town Council consensus direction received
on June 4, 2007 that will cause the final published budget to differ slightly from what is
presented for adoption. Any other minor adjustments as authorized by Town Council on June 4°i
will be incorporated within the final published budget document thereby not requiring a second
adoption of the annual budget.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of the Town and Redevelopment Agency's FY 2007/08 Operating and Capital
Budgets is provided in the Financial Summaries section of the budget document including
estimates of Fund Reserves at June 30, 2007.
As stated by staff at the public hearing on May 7, 2008, the Town will continue to monitor local
economic developments and associated impacts to the Town and RDA's adopted FY 2007/08
budgets. It is currently anticipated that staff will bring forward any further adjustments
necessary in the Town's mid year budget review. These adjustments may include some further
actions necessary to align operating revenues with expenditures, however staff cannot determine
at this time whether or not these will be required.
PAGE 7
MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2007/08 OPERATING/CAPITAL
BUDGET
MAY 31, 2007
Attachments:
1. Resolution of the Town Council Approving FY 2007/08 Operating Budget and FY 2007-12
Capital Improvement Plan
2. Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency Approving FY 2007/08 Operating Budget and FY
2007-12 Capital Improvement Plan
3. Letter from Santa Clara County Executive Pete Kutras, dated May 10, 2007
RESOLUTION 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
APPROVING FY 2007/08 OPERATING BUDGET & FY's 2007/08 - 2011/12 CAPITAL BUDGET
AND CARRY-FORWARD APPROPRIATIONS AND OTHER APPROVED ADJUSTMENTS
RELATING TO MEET AND CONFER PROCESS, MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION PLAN,
CLASSIFICATION ADJUSTMENTS, MINOR CORRECTIONS, AND REFINED ESTIMATES
WHEREAS, Section 2.30.295(b) of the Los Gatos Town Code requires the Town Manager
to annually prepare and submit a budget to the Town Council and be responsible for its administration;
and
WHEREAS, the Town Manager did submit a proposed budget for the 2007/08 to the Town
Council; and
WHEREAS, the Town Manager did submit a proposed five-year capital improvement plan
for FY's 2007/08 - 2011/12; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council has considered and reviewed said proposed budget and
capital improvement plan during public hearings.
RESOLVED, that the Town Council hereby adopts as the budget for the Town of Los
Gatos for the 2007/08 fiscal year the schedule entitled "Total Town Revenues By Fund and Total Town
Expenditures By Fund" including the first year (FY 2007/08) of the Town's Capital Improvement
Program budget as contained in the Town's FY's 2007/08 - 2011/12 Capital Improvement Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the final adopted budget includes approved carry-
forward appropriations for unspent operating grants and pass-throughs from FY 2006/07, and that there
be carried forward from prior year's Reserve for Encumbrances within each fund an amount sufficient to
cover approved outstanding encumbrances as of June 30, 2007;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Council hereby directs staff that any
changes or impacts resulting from: Council approval of the meet and confer process or management
compensation plan; from classification adjustments or miscellaneous corrections; from changes due to
more refined estimates or grant approvals; or from further Town Council consensus direction received on
June 4, 2006, be incorporated within the final FY 2007/08 Operating and Capital Budget.
2007-08 Operating Budget Reso.doc ATTACHMENT I
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Los
Gatos, California, held on the 4th day of June, 2007 by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
MAYOR OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
CLERK OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS
LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
2007-08 Operating Budget Reso.doc
RESOLUTION 2007-
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CONSENTING TO THE PROVISION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS BY THE LOS GATOS
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MAKING MANDATORY FINDINGS IN REGARDS TO
CAPITAL PROJECTS PROVIDED FOR IN THE LOS GATOS REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
FY 2007/08 OPERATING AND FY's 2007/08 - 2011/12 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, Section 33445 of the Health and Safety Code requires the local legislative body to
consent to the provision of public improvements by its Redevelopment Agency and make findings: 1) that
the public improvements are of benefit to the project area or the immediate neighborhood of the project
area; 2) that no other reasonable means of financing such public improvements are available to the
community, and; 3) that the Agency's contribution to the cost of the public improvement or facility will
assist in eliminating one or more blighting conditions in the project area, and is consistent with the
Agency's implementation plan adopted pursuant to Section 33490 of the Health and Safety Code, the
("Implementation Plan"), and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency's FY 2007/08 - 2011/12 Capital Budget provides
funding for the following projects (the "Projects"): 1) Elm Street Reconstruction; 2) Almond Grove
Rehabilitation Pilot Project; 3) N. Santa Cruz Lighting; 4) S. Santa Cruz/Wood Gateway
WHEREAS, the Projects will be of substantial benefit to the downtown business district and
surrounding areas of the Central Los Gatos Redevelopment Project Area (the "Project Area") established
pursuant to the 1991 Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan");
WHEREAS, the Town has limited financial resources for capital improvements and these funds
are committed to other critical infrastructure needs of the Town such as repairing aging streets outside of
the Project Area;
WHEREAS, the Projects have been specifically called for in the Town's Redevelopment Plan and
Implementation Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown infrastructure was initially in a deteriorated condition with broken
pavement, deteriorated streets and alleys, deteriorated sidewalks, and functionally obsolescent, and the
capital projects have helped, and continue to help, eliminate these blighting conditions;
ATTACHMENT2
2007-08 RDA Resolution.doc
ATTACHMENT2
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Council of the TOWN OF LOS GATOS does
hereby consent to the provision of funding for the Capital Projects by the Los Gatos Redevelopment
Agency in accordance with the Agency's FY 2007/08 Operating and FY 2007/08 - 2011/12 Capital
Improvement Program budgets totaling adopted revenues of $8,874,790 and expenditures of $6,236,457
(prior to carry-forward appropriations); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby finds that the Projects are of
benefit to the Project Area and the immediate neighborhood of the Project Area; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby finds that no other reasonable
means of financing such public improvements are available to the community; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby finds that the Los Gatos
Redevelopment Agency's contribution to the cost of the public improvements will assist in eliminating
blighting conditions in the Project Area, and is consistent with the Implementation Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Agency Board hereby directs staff that any changes or
impacts resulting from: Council approval of the meet and confer process or management compensation
plan; from classification adjustments or miscellaneous corrections; from changes due to more refined
estimates or grant approvals; or from further Agency Board consensus direction received June 4, 2007, be
incorporated within the final FY 2007/08 Operating and Capital Budget.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the Town of
Los Gatos held the 4th day of June, 2007, by the following vote:
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEMBERS:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
CHAIR OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
ATTEST:
SECRETARY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TOWN OF LOS GATOS, CALIFORNIA
2007-08 RDA Resolution.doc
County of Santa Clara
Eleventh Floor - East Wing
70 West Hedding Street
San Jose, California 95110
G~
s ~ r
Date: May 10, 2007
To: City Managers
From: Peter Kutras, Jr.
County Executive
Subject: Increase in the Property Tax Administration Fee
I am writing to explain the increase to the County of Santa Clara's fee for its property tax
administration function due to the passage of Senate Bill (SB) 1096 as well as to communicate the
Controller-Treasurer's efforts to advise affected jurisdictions of the upcoming fee increase. This
fee increase has been anticipated since 2004 when the legislature passed SB 1096.
The Revenue and Taxation Code (Sections 95.2 through 95.4) authorizes counties to charge a
property tax administration fee to local jurisdictions, except schools and community colleges, for
costs incurred by counties in assessing, collecting, and apportioning property taxes to
jurisdictions. Since school and community college districts are exempt from the charge, counties
generally do not recover all of their costs. Over the years, the County has recovered only about
24% of its costs from cities, special districts, and redevelopment agencies. Due to SB1096, the
County's recovery rate has now increased to 33%.
1. Impact of SB 1096
a. VLF Swap and Triple Flip
SB 1096 replaced vehicle license fee (VLF Swap) and a portion of local sales tax
allocated to cities and counties (Triple Flip) with property taxes; thus providing a greater
share of property tax revenues. The law prohibited the imposition of any fee, charge, or
levy on cities for the administration and calculation required by the property tax shift in
fiscal years 2005 and 2006. For subsequent years (FY2007 and onwards), the allocation
formulae for charging the property tax administration fee were to include all property tax
revenues. Since the VLF Swap and Triple Flip are considered property tax revenues, the
percentage share of property tax dollars allocated to cities has increased. This has
contributed to about 80 percent of the increase in the fee charged to cities.
ATTACHMENT 3
Property Tax Administration Fee
b. ERAF-111
Page 2 of 2
SB 1096 also required that non-school entities (counties, cities, special districts, and
redevelopment agencies) make additional contributions to the Educational Revenue
Augmentation Fund (ERAF-III) for fiscal years 2005 and 2006. ERAF-III requirements
expired in FY2006. The amounts contributed by various jurisdictions to ERAF-III were
reduced from property tax dollars allocated to them. This reduced the percentage share of
property tax dollars allocated to non-school entities (about a 20 percent reduction) for those
two years. As a result, the property tax administration fee charged to cities was lower than
it would have otherwise been. Since ERAF-I11 ended last fiscal year, cities, special
districts, and redevelopment agencies are now receiving their ERAF-III contributions as
property tax revenue, and will experience a corresponding increase in the fee to the pre-
ERAF-III level.
2. AB117 - Santa Clara TEA Legislation
Since the property tax administration fee is charged based on tax dollars allocated to non-
school entities, additional property tax revenues allocated to four cities in the county
(Cupertino, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and Los Altos Bills) due to AB 117 has increased their
share of the property tax administration fee as well.
The County engaged in early efforts to counsel cities, special districts, and redevelopment
agencies of the forthcoming changes so that agencies could properly prepare for the financial
impacts. Our Controller-Treasurer collaborated with the State Association of County Auditors to
draft guidelines for counties in addressing various provisions of SB 1096. As the guidelines and
models were being developed, our Controller-Treasurer warned members of the cities' Finance
Officers Group at its meeting in April, 2004 of the impending fiscal impacts and kept them
abreast of the legislative process.
Later, on August 19, 2004, our Controller-Treasurer made a formal presentation to the Finance
Officers Group and offered hand-outs that depicted the schedule of changes and modeled the fiscal
impact on local cities. The draft guidelines and models that were shared with the finance officers
were the ones later adopted. The guidelines were officially issued in October 2004, and they
included examples that clearly showed higher property tax administration costs for cities in FY200T
The County also provided a workshop to cities on SB1096 on November 8, 2004 that provided
information about how SB 1096 would affect the County's property tax administration fee
charged to cities beginning in FY2007.
I believe the County's efforts to counsel cities about the forthcoming financial impacts were
exemplary, and that cities had ample time and information to properly budget for the FY2007
impacts.